RE: [pinhole-discussion] how useful is slide film for pinhole photography
I use slide film almost exclusively for larger format pinhole work--120 and up. The newer fujis are wonderful films without much reciprocity failure at pinhole exposure times. And light fall-off is an important and desirable aspect of pinhole for me. As in most things, testing your own equipment to your own standards is the final answer. That said, a 4x5 pinhole chrome on a light table is a joy to behold as is a nice strip of sleeved 120. good luck, Howard > [Original Message] > From: Håkan Thörngren > To: > Date: 11/26/2003 8:37:29 AM > Subject: [pinhole-discussion] how useful is slide film for pinhole photography > > I am considering a pinhole camera (Zero 612F 6x12) and would prefer to > use slide film. Part because I like slide film, part because I do not > have any medium format scanner or enlarger. Using a light table is my > only current means of looking at the photos. > > How useful is slide film in such camera=3F I am worried because of the= > > limited latitude in slide film and light fall off (the difference in > how far light goes inside the camera in the middle compared to the > edges). > > /H=E5kan > > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/ --- Howard Wells --- sandw...@earthlink.net --- home.earthlink.net/~sandwell --- EarthLink: The #1 provider of the Real Internet.
[pinhole-discussion] Body-caps & focal length
For the precisely inclined there is a useful table of film plane to lens flange measurements at the following URL: http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm Jan Willem's site is full of other interesting topics as well. --- Howard Wells --- sandw...@earthlink.net --- EarthLink: The #1 provider of the Real Internet.
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Disposable Camera as Pinhole
I've done this extensively in workshops and can send you a handout I use for disposable cameras if you wish. some brands work better than others because they can take a normal 35mm cassette, others use a cassette that has a castellated or splined spool top. A nylon quarter-20 nut epoxied to the bottom of the camera can be a tripod socket and some students have made foam-core sliding shutters though black tape works as well. I love the so-called disposable cameras. Let me know if you want the handout and I'll get it to you (and anyone else who might want it) this weekend. Right now I'm closing in a deadline getting an editorial memo to a guy who was CEO and Chairman of a 40 billion dollar company and whose honesty and integrity could make one believe in big business again. Cheers, Howard Wells > [Original Message] > From: Patrick Barrett > To: > Date: 3/14/2003 9:37:15 AM > Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Disposable Camera as Pinhole > > Hello Pinholers, > I beleive I've read something here in the not too distant past about > replacing the lens and shutter of a disposable camera with a pinhole. I've > searched the archives to not much avail. > > Has anyone done this? Are there websites with diagrams et cetera? > > I plan to run a small pinhole workshop on pinhole day again this year. Last > year we made oatmeal box, pringle can, tea tin cameras and I think this year > I'd like to have my "students" (friends) try disposable cameras (since they > use standard sized film). > > Any help would be much appreciated. > > --Patrick > > _ > Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online > http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/ --- Howard Wells --- sandw...@earthlink.net --- EarthLink: The #1 provider of the Real Internet.
[pinhole-discussion] Fuji FP-100C Reciprocity
I'm a great fan of the Fuji "Polaroid" pack film. Very nice natural colors and without the cyan-ish shift of the Polaroid products. I was able to test the film in a pinhole camera as I sat at my desk yesterday editing a manuscript. At a metered 2 minute exposure, the actual exposure for a decent image is 128 minutes. I'll try to test at shorter ie more outdoor exposure times soon. Have a good weekend everyone. --- Howard Wells --- sandw...@earthlink.net --- EarthLink: The #1 provider of the Real Internet.
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pinhole nude question
Catherine, I've spent a good bit of time battling the lone exposure times of pinhole using a lot of pinholes in the f128 to f150 range with fast film but I've also been able to get interesting effects with lenses without resorting to filters. One method to create pinhole type effects while reducing exposure times is to use a lens either focused past infinity (ie closer to the film plane than infinity) or to move a lens into the macro focus area. In 35mm I use a focusing extension tube (by Zorkendorfer) with enlarging lenses for this. Stopping all the way down increases the "detail" and if the lens makes a circular aperture the effect can be quite pleasing. I've also shot landscapes with a 55mm macro lens focused at 9 inches and stopped all the way down. Lately I've been putting a Russian 28mm leica thread lens on my nikons. Actual point of focus is about 3 inches from the front of the lens. I've also shot portraits by holding a loupe or other simple lens in front of the camera. Very easy with a 4x5 camera, or any camera with bellows, of course and you have more information to play with on the negative. Hope this helps a little. I'm a tireless experimenter. Howard Wells Catherine Just wrote: > > I was wondering about the lighting! Thanks for the > info. I'm printing it out for a reference! > > Sounds like I'm better off doing a long exposure - > inside - with controlled lighting - with a regular > lens camera... > > Catherine > --- Colin Talcroft wrote: > > Hi Catherine, > > > > Thanks for saying you like my work, and I'm glad to > > hear that looking at it was of help. Thought you and > > anyone else interested might find it useful to know > > that those three nudes (including the one you > > mention > > specifically) were all done indoors usually with one > > > > 500 Watt light. The film was T-Max 100. Exposures > > with > > a lens were usually 4 to 16 seconds at f=16 if I > > remember correctly. The pinhole exposures usually > > were > > about 20 minutes at the least, often more like 30, > > and > > sometimes as long as 40 minutes. It's not a > > coincidence that the pinhole poses are mostly > > reclining. That's about the only way to stay still > > for > > that length of time. Often the model would fall > > asleep! I can remeber a session or two during which > > I > > set up the pinholes, let them go, spent 10 or > > fifteen > > minutes doing lens photos, and still had time to get > > out a sketchbook and do some drawings before > > finishing > > the pinhole exposures and setting up a new pose! > > > > Colin > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site > > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ > > > > ___ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???/discussion/ > > = > Catherine Just Photography > Weddings~Portraits~Fine Art > http://www.catherinejust.com > 619.294.3195 > > "Don't just state your intent, Live it." ~Jerry Seiner Jr. > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] weddings
The still-life idea is a good one. I've shot hand-held 35mm pinhole at weddings but mostly have used altered lens plastic cameras for exactly that romantic pictorialist feel. I'll scan some images and send the urls. I only do weddings for people who have seen my other work and appreciate it. And I always hire a real wedding photographer to get the shots for the grandparents. My clients are without exception other people in the co-called creative community. Howard Wells "Gordon J. Holtslander" wrote: > > Hi: > > I think it would be really intersting to take pictures of some of the > significant objects involved in the wedding with a pinhole camera - rings > flowers, hands holding etc - sort of still-lifes instead of just > portraits. > > A pinhole camera could give them a "romantic pictorialist" feel. > > It would add another dimension to what you could do - not just portraits > > I had people who wanted black&white portraits in addition to the usual > colore group shots and portraits > > I did a biker wedding once - lots of fun - they didn't want plain old > wedding shots. No pinhole camera > > Gord > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Catherine Just wrote: > > > > > I am curious if anyone has used a pinhole camera at a > > wedding? > > > > I would LOVE to use one there as another means to > > creating alternative imagery while also...supporting > > myself with the craft! > > > > My website just went up 2 days ago...mainly for my > > commercial work. I think the fine art doesn't read > > very well on the site. > > > > > > http://www.catherinejust.com > > > > would LOVE to have people think of me if interested in > > more alternative ways to capture everyday/special > > events. > > > > C > > > > = > > "Don't just state your intent, Live it." ~Jerry Seiner Jr. > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! > > http://sbc.yahoo.com > > > > ___ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???/discussion/ > > > > - > Gordon J. Holtslander Dept. of Biology > hol...@duke.usask.ca112 Science Place > http://duke.usask.ca/~holtsgUniversity of Saskatchewan > Tel (306) 966-4433 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan > Fax (306) 966-4461 Canada S7N 5E2 > - > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pintoids revisited
I'll add to that the broken bits of sea shells that are ridden with tiny holes. erick...@hickorytech.net wrote: > > Since you are an adventurer re pinholes, I'll pass on an idea I've been > playing with. Spontaneous pinholes. Small apertures like the little holes in > soda crackers, or arrays as in the tops of salt shakers make for wonderfully > rewarding experiments. > - Original Message - > From: "Marcy Merrill" > To: > Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 12:19 AM > Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Pintoids revisited > > > Hi all: A while back there was a thread about pinhole cameras made from > > Altoid containers. I meant to comment. Later, there was a thread about > > multiple-holed pinhole cameras. I meant to comment. I just finished an > > exhibit of some of my pinhole images. I meant to post about it. > > Anyway, I've spent my afternoon posting Pintoid images to my Pintoid page > > ( www.merrillphoto.com/pintoids.htm ). I've been using acupuncture needles > > to make pinholes and they work well. I'm going to try porcupine quills > next. > > Anyone tried it? Just curious. I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks to > > everyone for such an informative list! -MM > > > > Marcy Merrill > > Photographer > > www.merrillphoto.com > > > > > > > > ___ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???/discussion/ > > > > > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
[pinhole-discussion] Fuji Provias for Pinhole
Tom, I forgot to mention the tungsten balanced 64t which is also a Provia family member. Most of my several minute long exposures have been indoors so the color balance was quite warm because of household tungsten lighting. It is my impression that the film goes slightly magenta at some point. I'm never too scientific with my exposures and color casts don't bother me. Sometimes I cross-process or shoot tungsten balanced film in daylight just for the look. But as in everything personal testing under your normal conditions is the answer. I do like the Provias very much and consider them worth working with for pinhole. I also use all three films for commercial and editorial lensed photography. I just bought a couple hundred feet of the Fuji RMS slide film ans well as brick of 120 from Freestyle. That is the pushable slide film that has been discontinued. Fuji gave me a few rolls when it came out and I recall liking it but not seeing a real use for it. I'll report on my results pinhole and otherwise for those who are interested. Anybody else using it? Cheers, Howard Wells Tom Hawkins wrote: > > Thanks Howard, I'll give them a go, I suspect that sensia is the film I used > last time (it was the cheapest) so I'd say that in my hands it didn't have > much latitude but I did only try one roll! > > Fuji's website says that for Provia no exposure or colour adjustment is > necessary up to 128s exposure but beyond that some colour adjustment is > necessary and +1/3 of a stop. Have you found this working with these films > and pinhole? And have you done longer exposures in the 8 mins plus range > where they "don't recommend use"? > > Tom > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Colour slide film latitude
The Fuji Provias both seem to have good latitude and good reciprocity characteristics. Not as much as negative films, of course, but very usable for pinhole in my opinion. I use them for pinhole in 35, 120 and 4x5. I have not used the Fuji Sensia series and would welcome input from someone who has used both. Sensia is less expensive. Howard Wells
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Exposure meters
The out-of-production Quantum Calcu-Light XP is a very accurate simple (inexpensive) meter with a dial that is easy to extrapolate beyond the marked settting of 128. For me with pinhole, dial meters seem to be faster to use than the digital type. There are also exposure charts in Eric Renner's book and Jim Lehman's Black Cat guide among other lower tech solutions. I use a meter indoors but outside pretty much just wing it. I'm starting on a series of pinhole portraits with short telephoto focal lengths and fstops around f150. An exercise to purge having had to look at, and critique, someone's studio-strobe lit, muslin backdropped, nikkor lensed, figure studies. I know, of course, that soft doesn't make a bad photo good but bad and too sharp is just awful to me. Howard Wells chad white wrote: > > what is a good light meter for pinhole f-stops ? i am lurking e-bay ,i > what to buy a light meter that can be used practically for pinhole. i > don't want to use the math. i just want a simple light meter so i can > spend my energy taking pinhole images. i noticed that most light-meters > stop about f-16. f-225 or higher is better for me. > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pinhole camera from disposable camera?
I think I know what you mean by uncoupling the shutter but I'm not sure. And I'm probably telling you something you already know. If so forgive me. Most of the single-use cameras are similar and usually all you have to do is remove the shutter "blade" (found in the lens assembly) and leave the film advance mechanism (which also cocks the shutter) alone. Tape makes the new shutter but you still have to press the shutter release in order to advance the film to the next frame. So in that sense I have not uncoupled the shutter from the film advance and indeed, have never tried to do so. I used to give workshops in altering and reloading single-use cameras. They make fine 35mm pinhole cameras. There is also a fellow somewhere on the web who converted disposable Kodaks to a pinhole camera with a "T" shutter. As I recall you pressed a rod to open and close the shutter. I asked him for details but he was busy or had forgotten or perhaps it was too complicated to explain to a lay-person. Howard Wells Guy Glorieux wrote: > > Has anybody converted a new 35mm disposable camera into a pinhole > camera? I've been looking into this, but I haven't found a way of > uncoupling the shutter. > Guy > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] increased sharpness?
Yes they have both the Hoyas and the Shott listed under "commercial quality bandpass filters" in their industrial catalog. They are unmounted which is not a problem for pinhole or zoneplate. Howard Wells Andy Schmitt wrote: > > I've been looking for one for a while. The optical UV filters are real > expensive (+100$). Does Edmunds have the optical grade UV filters at a > decent price? > thanks > andy > > -Original Message- > From: pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ??? > [mailto:pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ???]On Behalf Of Howard Wells > Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 10:46 AM > To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? > Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] increased sharpness? > > http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2_PC.html > > See the link above for a suggestion that exposing pinhole with nothing > but UV makes a sharper photo. I've been thinking about buying one of the > appropriate filters from Edmund Scientific and trying UV pinhole this > summer. Has anyone done it? > > Howard Wells > > "G.Penate" wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jim Kosinski" > > > > > in the formulas used to determine the optimal pinhole > > > diameter for a given focal distance the wavelength of green > > > light seems to be used because it's in the center of the > > > visible spectrum... would it be possible to get more > > > sharpness with the same pinhole diameter by changing the > > > color of the light? for example, what if you used a blue bulb > > > to illuminate the subject or put a color filter over the > > > pinhole? (assuming black & white film/paper) > > > > Yes to all the ??? above. > > > > Would you really see a markedly difference in the results? Not quite sure. > > > > Guillermo > > > > ___ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???/discussion/ > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/ > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] increased sharpness?
http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2_PC.html See the link above for a suggestion that exposing pinhole with nothing but UV makes a sharper photo. I've been thinking about buying one of the appropriate filters from Edmund Scientific and trying UV pinhole this summer. Has anyone done it? Howard Wells "G.Penate" wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Jim Kosinski" > > > in the formulas used to determine the optimal pinhole > > diameter for a given focal distance the wavelength of green > > light seems to be used because it's in the center of the > > visible spectrum... would it be possible to get more > > sharpness with the same pinhole diameter by changing the > > color of the light? for example, what if you used a blue bulb > > to illuminate the subject or put a color filter over the > > pinhole? (assuming black & white film/paper) > > Yes to all the ??? above. > > Would you really see a markedly difference in the results? Not quite sure. > > Guillermo > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: pinholes from polaroid one step camera
Gina, I haven't fiddled with the shutter at all. By using 600 film and large pinholes (somewhere in the f100 range) I'm still within the exposure range the camera was built for. Smaller pinholes might also work but probably only in bright light. Howard gina wrote: > > what do you do with the shutter mechanism to get it to stay open for the > longer exposures? I cant figure it out. help meee!!! > > thanks in advance, > Gina > > http://home.ix.netcom.com/~ginabell/index.html > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about "sharpness"?
Not to defend Guillermo, who in any case needs no defending, but I agree that the optimals are a good place for most people to start. It is a good place to begin your exploration because it guarantees a reasonable image. I show students a variety of different efects using zone plate and various pinholes but I always give them an optimal one to start with. My own work tends toward the softer images but I just got back half a dozen 4x5 chromes from my lab that were shot with an f600 camera of about 12" focal length. Plenty sharp--tested an f533 and f600 seemed "sharper." And right for the intended purpose. On the other hand I'm doing portraits at f128 which are not sharp at all in the conventional sense. Pinhole never fails to excite me because of the possibilities. Guillermo's post about the pinhole formulas for close-up work sent me working on close-up cameras for a while. But if I hadn't started years ago with a decent pinhole that produced good images I might never have moved from lensed photography in to this infinitely exciting realm populated by all these nice, creative and sometimes erudite people. Cheers, Howard Wells michael_georg...@trendmicro.com wrote: > > Guillermo, in the course of explaining optimum pinhole formulas to Tom > Harvey, said "Since pinhole is not about "sharpness", use any pinhole size > for a particular distance pinhole-film, but I suggest you use what I call > the "scientific formulation" as the starting point from which deviate." > > With considerable respect to the Guillermo, to whom I owe a vast debt of > personal gratitude, I beg to differ. > > Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. > There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great > soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion > Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. > > HOWEVER, there are among us certain high-res knuckleheads who explore > pinhole not [exclusively] for painterly effect, but also for maximum > sharpness and depth of focus, especially for very close objects, and for > this sort of stuff, pinhole is very definitely about sharpness. Consider it > the "f.64: Seeing Straight" counterpoint to the soft-focus Pictorialists. > If pinhole is not about "sharpness" then why are there so many formulas for > optimum resolution, a Holy Grail of lensless? Why do I ponder so deeply the > differences between Petval, Rayleigh, Renner, Young, Patton, Bullis, > Fratkin, and even Penate himself? The Sharpness Formula God is apparently > something we must each discover on our own. > > In the context of Harvey's query, it's right to provide beginning guidance > (so as to not start with nail holes and fail to get good image formation on > a 35mm format) so that one has a starting point. Then wander off into > larger and smaller holes. Admittedly, much here is about experimentation. > And, image type and quality is a highly personal thing. But, you can't > dismiss sharpness as an ojbective. > > Pinhole can be about sharpness, as well as softness... it's also about time, > and light, perspective, art, science, chance and fun! > > Michael Georgoff > San Jose, CA > > (PS: Once again, the WWPD gallery is great: I look forward to seeing new > images, there are many, many great and inspiring images up there! Huge > thanks to all who worked to make it so!) > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Daylux
Have not used (or even heard of the Daylux) but I've been using converted One-Steps for quite a while. Very simple to remove the fromt panel, and then the lens. I use them with the 600 film which gives me more exposure range and a pinhole in the f90-f128 range for detail reduction. I've never tried to use one with an optimal pinhole though I have used the integral film in 4x5 film holders on a variety of pinhole cameras, home-made, conversions and commercial. Howard Wells Sarah Heidt wrote: > > This has probably already been discussed, but does anyone here have the > Daylux pinhole camera which takes Polaroid film? If so, how do you like it? > I have been wondering about doing pinhole with Polaroids. Anyone take the > lens off an SX-70 or One Step? I got one for 25 cents at a church rummage > sale and was thinking I might convert it. > > Sarah > > _ > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Favorite Cameras?
My favorites are converted (or commercial) roll film cameras. Either 120 or 35mm or 126 or 127 or even 110. I like the convenience of using roll film vs cameras that use sheets of paper or film. They suit my working methods well, as do polaroid backs for larger formats. That said I love 4x5 film box cameras, especially those made from the 10 sheet boxes, and I have a couple bulk film, film can cameras I've never loaded yet. Making cameras is certainly part of the whole appeal of this simple accessible process. Howard Wells
[pinhole-discussion] Type 55 Field Leaks
Agree that Tupperware leaks. The field process I outlined before my coffee (and is stolen from Marc Hauser) involves moist paper towels and sponge. No sloshing liquids, which can be carried in a water bottle. It does involve handling wet towels and sponge so that probably leaves the Sodium S. solution out unless you uses gloves. And I also agree that Type 55 in the field is a pain no matter how you cut it. (Peel off that print with your sticky negative exposed jusat as the wind kicks up!) The best, and most expensive solution to my mind, is to shoot a sheet and develop for exposure, then shoot the keeper and develop it at home. 4x5 film holders while they take up a lot of room are much less fussy. And the project I need the reciprocity info for is strictly interiors within reach of my bucket. A tip for anyone who has trouble grasping the film to pull it through the rollers and out of the 545 holder. Use a plastic coated A clamp to grip the film. Howard Wells
[pinhole-discussion] Type 55 Field Use
Tupperware (or other flat sealable plastic) container with interleaved paper towels and a sponge of enough thickness to hold the stack of negatives still when the container is closed. Wetting agent is water or Permawash. Or the bucket clearing tank with the filmholder insert available from various sources. Howard Wells dalf...@aol.com wrote: > > While the focus is on discussion of Typ55 Polaroid films, I have a question. > Once I press the "process" lever on my 4X5 film holder and pull and wait > the amount of time needed to develop correctly , I then peel apart the > 'pod(?) and seperate the negative from the positive print , and wash in Hypo > Clearing Agent , then hang to dry, and print from there , once the neg is dry > .This is easily done at home , but > My question to those of you who use Type 55 in the field is this, "How do you > keep the negative moist until you get home and can process the neg with HCA ? > A holding tank of some sort, a bucket of water, zip lock baggie filled with > water, ? Any suggestions . ? > > Thanks > dalf...@aol.com > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Type 55 reciprocity adjustments
Thank you Adrian, that is the post I remembered. Howard Wells Adrian Joyner wrote: > > Will this copy of an earlier email help: > > Adrian Joyner > Clevedon > England > > Laura > > Excuse me for butting in. I regularlyuse Type 55 at ISO 25 and use the > > following reciprocity corrections: > > Indicated exposure Correction factor Final exposure > > 8 seconds 2x 16 seconds > > 16 seconds 2.5x 40 seconds > > 32 seconds 3x 96 seconds > > 64 seconds 4x 256 seconds > > 2 minutes 5x 10 minutes > > 4 minutes 6x 24 minutes > > Hope this helps. > > Regards > > Derek Watkins > > - Original Message - > From: "Howard Wells" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 3:44 PM > Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Type 55 reciprocity adjustments > > > Late last year a list member published a chart of reciprocity > > adjustments with Type 55 Polaroid. I printed it out, lost it, and now > > can't find it in the archives. Some interior work has taken me into > > uncharted (to me) realms with this wonderful material. Help and thanks. > > Howard Wells > > > > ___ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???/discussion/ > > > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
[pinhole-discussion] Type 55 reciprocity adjustments
Late last year a list member published a chart of reciprocity adjustments with Type 55 Polaroid. I printed it out, lost it, and now can't find it in the archives. Some interior work has taken me into uncharted (to me) realms with this wonderful material. Help and thanks. Howard Wells
Re: SV: [pinhole-discussion] Pinholing with SLR and extension tubes
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I tape the actual pinhole--drilled, poked or otherwise put through brass shim stock--over a small hole in the disc of foamcore board. Which is exactly what you say it is. Good luck, Howard Wells Dennis Johanson wrote: > > Thank you for your reply, Howard. Lens shade - that was exactly the sort of > idea that I was looking for. Since English, not even American English, isn't > my mother tongue (but it was my father's BTW) I just want to check with you > that foamcore is what I think, namely plastic foam in the middle covered by > thin cardboard on each side. If so, will you get "sharp" pictures in spite of > the thickness of the foam, which I estimate to be about 0,5 cm or 1/4" - 1/8"? > Dennis > > - Original Message - > From: Howard Wells > To: > Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 3:38 PM > Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pinholing with SLR and extension tubes > > > Works fine for me. I use black foamcore cut into circles for the pinhole > > "holder." Mostly I use this technique with zoneplates and put an > > additional tube on the front as a lens shade. this also allows for easy > > comparison testing of different size pinholes. I use old Leica > > threadmount tubes on my old leica, they are inexpensive and seem to come > > in a good range of sizes. One could also use the black plastic plumbing > > pipe or cardboard mailing tubes. > > Howard Wells > > > > > Dennis Johanson wrote: > > > > > > This week I got an old SLR back from service, and I have a set of > > > extension tubes for it. An idea came to my mind, namely to use one or > > > more of the extension tubes with a pinholed lens cap or aluminum foil > > > at front. I could even get a second extension tube set and use these > > > ones separately as front tubes with permanent holes of different > > > diameters that would fit different combinations of the other tube > > > set. > > > > > > Probably someone has tried this already, and if so I would be very > > > interested in learning the outcome of it as well as in getting some > > > suggestions for improving my idea. > > > > > > The best way is to try it out myself, but hey, I am the guy presently > > > converting a (too small) guest toilet into a darkroom, and that keeps > > > me busy enough for the moment. > > > > > > Dennis > > > > ___ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???/discussion/ > > ___ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pinholing with SLR and extension tubes
Works fine for me. I use black foamcore cut into circles for the pinhole "holder." Mostly I use this technique with zoneplates and put an additional tube on the front as a lens shade. this also allows for easy comparison testing of different size pinholes. I use old Leica threadmount tubes on my old leica, they are inexpensive and seem to come in a good range of sizes. One could also use the black plastic plumbing pipe or cardboard mailing tubes. Howard Wells > Dennis Johanson wrote: > > This week I got an old SLR back from service, and I have a set of > extension tubes for it. An idea came to my mind, namely to use one or > more of the extension tubes with a pinholed lens cap or aluminum foil > at front. I could even get a second extension tube set and use these > ones separately as front tubes with permanent holes of different > diameters that would fit different combinations of the other tube > set. > > Probably someone has tried this already, and if so I would be very > interested in learning the outcome of it as well as in getting some > suggestions for improving my idea. > > The best way is to try it out myself, but hey, I am the guy presently > converting a (too small) guest toilet into a darkroom, and that keeps > me busy enough for the moment. > > Dennis
Re: [pinhole-discussion] transparency film?
Sorry for the confusion. Yes it is simply slide film. I tend to speak of it as transparency film when it is in sizes larger than 35mm--120, 4x5 etc. The 120 is sleeved uncut and the 4x5 is in a glassine envelope. Howard R Duarte wrote: sorry if this is a stupid question, but what do you do with transparency > film after you shoot it? if you were to bring the roll to a lab, what would > it look like after they process it and hand it back to you? is this just > slide film? > > thanks for any info.. > rob > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
[pinhole-discussion] (STRICTLY PERSONAL) plus Polaroid Pinhole. Long
What I find interesting about this now-years-old fraud is the choice of names intended to evoke what? Trust? Honesty? Or just familiarity. Mandela's name is spotless but at least in this country Clinton may rub some folks the wrong way. Three decades ago I tried without success to earn some money in a phone sales boiler room. the most successful salespeople all used names vaguely reminiscent of popular local disc jockeys or ball players. Two on topic items: I've long shot with Polaroid Sx-70s, 690s and various peel-apart film cameras and backs. I've used integral film (either Time Zero or 600) in film box pinhole cameras and in 4x5 sheet film backs. Of course then I have to place the pack back in the appropriate camera for processing. And the image--not going through the SLR mirror of the camera--is laterally reversed, which for some images is undesirable. I've spoken with my camera repair person about converting an SX-70 camera to eject film on demand. with that conversion I could replace the lens/shutter assembly with a pinhole and tape shutter, make my exposure and eject the film when I was finished. The repair person indicates that this conversion is much more difficult than I would hope. If anyone else is interested in this project I'll report progress back to the list. I've always shot a lot of transparency film in various pinhole cameras, partially because I always have it around for non-pinhole purposes, and partially because of its beauty. Lately I've been using the 120 version of Fuji Provia 400F. A wonderful film with great reciprocity for long exposures. Sharp, good contrast. Lovely. Highly recommended. Howard Wells
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Home made 4x5 pinhole camera ?
The point being that some spray paints actually seem to dry before they hit the surface to be painted, causing dust and a delicate surface. Brushing on paint removes that problem. Blackboard paint I assume is paint intended to turn a surface into a chalkboard. I've seen it in hardware stores and think the idea is sound enough that I'm going to go buy a can. Happy Holidays to all, Howard Wells b2myo...@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 12/11/01 5:16:25 PM, twmil...@mr.net writes: > > << Zernike mentioned using paint that can be > > brushed on rather than painted as a possible solution. >> > > Isn't painting, brushing on? > I'm so confused here. > > Thank you all for your responses. > That's what's so great about this board. > Tremendously supportive. > Happy Holiday to one and all. > Best, > leezy > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
[pinhole-discussion] Kudos and a Query
I know I am not alone in my appreciation of the tremendous resources available on this list, Guillermo being a prime example. I always learn something from his posts. Thank you Guillermo, thank you all for your intelligence, artistry and civility. It is always an inspiration. I've already altered an ancient Leonardo to be a close-up camera. I've also been using a PhotoTechnicalGroup (f512) camera with good effect. Well-built, easy to use, only lacks a graphloc back. Does anyone have an email address for Dominique Stroobant? I had communicated via his son Ishmael's hotmail account years ago but would like to get in touch with him again. His 17mm pinhole for Leica thread mount is still my most beloved pinhole, especially for hand-held work. Thanks, Howard Wells http://home.earthlink.net/~sandwell/ Guillermo wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Gregg Kemp" > > > Guillermo, I don't remember ever seeing your correction formula before. > Is > > that theoretical, or have you tested it? > > Theoretical, Gregg, as I haven't done any close up work myself. > > For those (few) people interested in were that correction factor comes from, > here it is: > > ** > Pinhole is in most ways, not different than glass lens photography. > > The lens conjugate equation is: > > 1 / F = 1 / I + 1 / O > > where I = distance pinhole to Image plane; F = Focal length and O = > distance pinhole to Object being photographed. > > We can simplify that to: F = I x O / I + O > > When the Object being photographed is at infinity ( O = infinity ): > > I + O = O > > therefore the formula F = I x O / I + O becomes: > > F = I x O / O and that becomes > > F = I > > In other words, when the Object is far away (more than 10 times the distance > pinhole to film, in practical terms), the Focal length of the camera is > equal to the distance pinhole to film plane. > > Now, when the Object being photographed is close to the pinhole lens (less > than 10 times the distance pinhole to film, in practical terms), the Focal > length of the camera is given by (as I stated above): > > F = I x O / I + O > > For close up work, then, "F" has to be substituted (in any of the formulas > for optimum pinhole size) by: > > I x O / I + O > > For instance, the formula I use is: > > D = 0.0073 x SQRT( F ) > > where D = pinhole diameter in inches; F=pinhole camera focal length and SQRT > stands for square root of > > For close up work that formula becomes: > > D = 0.0073 x SQRT( I x O / I + O ) > > As I said before, F = I for infinity, therefore I can write the infinity > formula as > > D = 0.0073 x SQRT( I ) > > Base on that, I can also rewrite the close-up formula as: > > D = 0.0073 x SQRT( I ) x SQRT ( O / I + O ) > > There you have the correction factor: > > SQRT ( O / I + O ) > > BTW, there are many formulas for optimum pinhole size but all have within > them "SQRT(F)", therefore, the above correction factor should apply fine to > all of them. > > Let's see an example: > > Our pinhole camera has a distance pinhole to film I = 8" and the Object > being photographed is O = 12" away from the pinhole, what size of pinhole > is the optimum to use: > > The optimum pinhole size for infinity is: > > D = 0.0073 x SQRT ( 8 ) > D = 0.020" (aprox) > > Correction factor is: SQRT ( 12 / 8 + 12 ) > Correction factor is: 0.774 > > Pinhole size for close up work (object 12" from pinhole lens) > > D = 0.020" * 0.774 > D = 0.0155" > > BTW, all the above is nothing but a sort of "bellows" correction. > > For people with mathfobia but that have read this msg up to this point, here > are some corrections factor based on how many times the camera > "pinhole-film" distance the object is away from the pinhole lens: > > less than 10 times => correction factor = 0.95 > less than 9 times => correction factor = 0.94 > less than 8 times => correction factor = 0.94 > less than 7 times => correction factor = 0.93 > less than 6 times => correction factor = 0.92 > less than 5 times => correction factor = 0.91 > less than 4 times => correction factor = 0.89 > less than 3 times => correction factor = 0.86 > less than 2 times => correction factor = 0.81 > less than 1 times => correction factor = 0.70 > less than 0.5 times => correction factor = 0.57 > > Another couple of formulas than may help the original's question poster are: > > Magnification M = I / O > > Therefore the C
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pinhole Construction ?
I make lens boards for my speed graphic from black mat board. Easy to cut a bunch and have various focal lengths and zoneplates handy. I also use black foamcore to mount pinholes in shutters. Easy and inexpensive. Your local frame shop can be a source of small pieces of matboard--especially if you are having them frame your work. Cheers, Howard Wells George L Smyth wrote: > > --- mdelman wrote: > > Ladies and gents: > > > > I have a series of laser drilled pinholes on a metal sheet that I purchased > > from pinhole resources. I'd like to use these on a press camera and have > > the convenience of easily changing the pinhole size. > > > > Does anyone know how I can create a light-tight turret to mount the pinholes > > on? Any other suggestions for accomplishing the same task? > > I kindof go the low-tech means of solving this. When I make pinholes, I put > each one into a slidemount. This allows me to change whenever I need to do so > quickly. > > Also, because I'm a cheapskate, I've made holders for my Crown Graphic from > pie > tins. They are not exactly the most steady things, but with care, will last > for a long time. > > Cheers - > > george > > = > Handmade Photographic Images > http://members.home.net/hmpi/ > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger. > http://im.yahoo.com > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] black flocking paper
Sorry, should have been more specific. Try searching at the following: http://www.scientificsonline.com/ Black Pressure Sensitive 20" x 30" Flocked Paper #55 coverweight. Adhesive backing. Package of 1 sheet. Stock Number: CR30706-21 I bought some a couple weeks ago. Good luck, Howard Wells Myron Gochnauer wrote: > > > From: Howard Wells > > ... I routinely put black flocked paper on the inside of all my > > homemade (and commercial) pinhole and zoneplate cameras which seems to > > cut down on stray light. Edmund Scientific sells it as do other DIY > > Telescope suppliers. > > My understanding is that Edmund Scientific is out of business or soon > will be. Does anyone have a specifi URL for a "camera grade" :-) > flocking paper? > > Myron > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] "Lens" Flare... ZeroImage 6x9?
Don't know about the new Zero Image, I have an original. Others have mentioned the brass plate inside the camera which may be a cause of the flare. I routinely put black flocked paper on the inside of all my homemade (and commercial) pinhole and zoneplate cameras which seems to cut down on stray light. Edmund Scientific sells it as do other DIY Telescope suppliers. Good luck, Howard Wells Jeff Dilcher wrote: > > Hello, > > I have been the happy owner of a ZeroImage 2000 > camera, and having been mulling the possibility > of buying one of the new 6x9 format versions. > > My older camera seemed very susceptible to lens > flare. The web page say: > > Matt black paints is applied at the inner part of the camera to prevent > light leak. The brass shim is stained black to avoid international > reflection and lens flare. > > I think they mean "internal" reflection. Does anyone know > if the newer cameras are less susceptible to flare? > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] sharpness
Sorry about not identifying the pinholes. They are the beach scene at the middle of the lefthand column and the image at the top of the righthand column. Both handheld using Ilford Delta 3200. As for the edges my lab prints with a filed-out negative carrier for me when I want the full image. The other images on the page are various forms of plastic camera, the self-portrait using a 17mm plastic lens on a 120 camera for that Sam Wang-ish circular image. I'm glad you like the images. Howard Wells Katharine Thayer wrote: > > Hi Howard, I like your images. I'm curious about the edges, which look > handcoated to me. Do you use an alternative printing process? > > And since there are nine images on your page, which are the two you're > talking about? > Katharine Thayer > > Howard Wells wrote: > > > And I have been delighted with the quality > > of 35mm pinhole photographs for years--either with homemade cameras, > > bodycaps or one of Dominique Stroobant's lens-less leica lenses. A > > couple of those images are at the address below. Both enlarge to make > > fine 8x10 prints. > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] sharpness
I agree with Michel. All the advertising for conventional photographic materials makes one think sharpness is the goal. I suppose it can be a legitimate goal for some purposes but not necessarily for expressive photography. I've spent a lot of time experimenting with ways to make modern materials less sharp. And I have been delighted with the quality of 35mm pinhole photographs for years--either with homemade cameras, bodycaps or one of Dominique Stroobant's lens-less leica lenses. A couple of those images are at the address below. Both enlarge to make fine 8x10 prints. "Take pictures and enjoy." Howard Wells http://home.earthlink.net/~sandwell/work.html Michel Dusariez wrote: > > About pinhole sharpness. > > An other field in photography is to consider the artistic results first, > put your magnifiers in your pocket and > stop to search indefinitelly the performance, > take pictures and enjoy. > > In the fields of sharpness nothing is never perfect, > I know photographers who devote their entire life in search of performance, > and never do real photography . > > Only tests, and test again ! > > Winners are only photography materials suppliers. > > Take your camera and take pictures. > > Michel DUSARIEZ > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] 35mm Short focal length
http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm This is the address for an extensive list of film to flange distances which shoukd point you in the right direction. Leica LTM cameras and their copies make the widest body-cap focal lengths. I convert 17mm Konica Single-Use Panoramics to wide-angle pinhole cameras. Wide enough for most purposes. Many cheap plastic cameras have a focal length of less than 30mm. Old folding 120 cameras also make great wide-angle pinhole cameras with that big negative. . . Howard Wells Stephen Rees wrote: > > I have a friend who has been experimenting using 126 cartridges. They are > about to go out of production. He has tried an ordinary 35mm SLR with a > body cap but the focal length of around 45mm is too long. Can anyone > recommend an inexpensive 35mm camera that can be converted into a pinhole > camera with a focal length less than 30mm ? > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] 35mm Short focal length
http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm This is the address for an extensive list of film to flange distances which shoukd point you in the right direction. Leica LTM cameras and their copies make the widest body-cap focal lengths. I convert 17mm Konica Single-Use Panoramics to wide-angle pinhole cameras. Wide enough for most purposes. Many cheap plastic cameras have a focal length of less than 30mm. Old folding 120 cameras also make great wide-angle pinhole cameras with that big negative. . . Howard Wells Stephen Rees wrote: > > I have a friend who has been experimenting using 126 cartridges. They are > about to go out of production. He has tried an ordinary 35mm SLR with a > body cap but the focal length of around 45mm is too long. Can anyone > recommend an inexpensive 35mm camera that can be converted into a pinhole > camera with a focal length less than 30mm ? > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???/discussion/
